Did congress eliminate the 2 year administrative revokation of citizenships? + Social Sec. question.

waterguy

Registered Users (C)
1. I used to read on this forum somewhere that there was some law that USCIS could administratively revoke anybody's citizenship in its first 2 years, without starting a law suite. Then I read that congress eliminated this. Had there really been such an administrative law? If yes, is it really eliminated? And what is the point of such an administrative law if USCIS makes its decisions using all information available for them at the time of the decision?

2. If I marry a Chile-USA dual citizen girl who has only had US citizenship for 1 year and worked only 1 year in this country, will I still have to sign this sponsorship form (I854?), even though Chile has a Social Security Equalization agreement with the USA?

Thanks.
 
Yes it's still there, however USCIS only issues a Notice of intent to revoke Nat'z if there is a serious misrepresentation/non disclosure of a material fact in the Application for Naturalization (N-400). After 2 years of Nat'z they cannot do it administratively and have to go through the District Court.

I am unable to understand the second part of your Q, if she is a US Citizen and she has worked for a year and that years income is above the 125 percent of the poverty line then she will have ti file the I -864, why do you have to sign that form?
Are you seeking a permanent resident status by virtue of your future marriage to her?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually, I am somewhat confused myself if I think of it, because I am not sure if she has the US citizenship any more or not, maybe she has. I am a US citizen. Maybe I should assume that she hasn't. Then may I still get away without signing if she has enough quarters worked in Chile in the past, to combine with her 4 US quarters for the Social Security eligibility?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes it's still there, however USCIS only issues a Notice of intent to revoke Nat'z if there is a serious misrepresentation/non disclosure of a material fact in the Application for Naturalization (N-400). After 2 years of Nat'z they cannot do it administratively and have to go through the District Court.
What makes you give wrong information consistently throughout this forum? I suggest you do some basic research before posting your answers.

The USCIS indeed still has the provision that allows it to administratively revoke someone's citizenship in the first two years, but they are prohibited from doing this by the US federal court. In 2001, in Gorbach v Reno, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a permanent nation-wide injunction barring the INS from administratively revoking citizenship of naturalised persons. It means that the citizenship can only be revoked by the federal court, period. The statute of administrative revocation is still in the USCIS policy, but so is the nation-wide injunction which renders it completely void. The Congress gave INS the power to naturalise applicants administratively, but it never gave explicit power to de-naturalise people administratively - it was something INS deducted (wrongly) itself. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the INS did not have the power to de-naturalise people via administrative process. AFAIK, the USCIS currently can only revoke the naturalisation certificate, but is is rather a symbolic move since the underlying citizenship will remain in place and can only be revoked by the court. Please google Gorbach v Reno (2000) for further details.
 
Congress didn't eliminate administrative denaturalization; the courts determined that they never authorized it in the first place.
 
What makes you give wrong information consistently throughout this forum? I suggest you do some basic research before posting your answers.

The USCIS indeed still has the provision that allows it to administratively revoke someone's citizenship in the first two years, but they are prohibited from doing this by the US federal court. In 2001, in Gorbach v Reno, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a permanent nation-wide injunction barring the INS from administratively revoking citizenship of naturalised persons. It means that the citizenship can only be revoked by the federal court, period. The statute of administrative revocation is still in the USCIS policy, but so is the nation-wide injunction which renders it completely void. The Congress gave INS the power to naturalise applicants administratively, but it never gave explicit power to de-naturalise people administratively - it was something INS deducted (wrongly) itself. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the INS did not have the power to de-naturalise people via administrative process. AFAIK, the USCIS currently can only revoke the naturalisation certificate, but is is rather a symbolic move since the underlying citizenship will remain in place and can only be revoked by the court. Please google Gorbach v Reno (2000) for further details.


Brother, read my post carefully, I merely said they can issue " INTENT TO REVOKE " never said they can revoke naturalization.
Nat'z is a very important Civil right and the judges take that very seriously including the IJ's.
 
What makes you give wrong information consistently throughout this forum? I suggest you do some basic research before posting your answers.

The USCIS indeed still has the provision that allows it to administratively revoke someone's citizenship in the first two years, but they are prohibited from doing this by the US federal court. In 2001, in Gorbach v Reno, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a permanent nation-wide injunction barring the INS from administratively revoking citizenship of naturalised persons. It means that the citizenship can only be revoked by the federal court, period. The statute of administrative revocation is still in the USCIS policy, but so is the nation-wide injunction which renders it completely void. The Congress gave INS the power to naturalise applicants administratively, but it never gave explicit power to de-naturalise people administratively - it was something INS deducted (wrongly) itself. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the INS did not have the power to de-naturalise people via administrative process. AFAIK, the USCIS currently can only revoke the naturalisation certificate, but is is rather a symbolic move since the underlying citizenship will remain in place and can only be revoked by the court. Please google Gorbach v Reno (2000) for further details.


Individuals who are U.S. citizens by birth cannot involuntarily have their citizenship taken away. For naturalized citizens, citizenship can be revoked only if the government is able to prove that such action is warranted. Rescission of naturalization, or denaturalization, is recommended only where there is objective evidence to establish one or more of the following conditions:

• Concealment or willful misrepresentation of material facts related to the naturalization application and proceedings;

• Illegal procurement of naturalization;

• Residence in a foreign country within 5 years after naturalization;

• Refusal within 10 years after naturalization to testify as a witness before a congressional committee concerning subversive activities; or

• Becoming a member of any proscribed subversive organization within 5 years of naturalization.

Other Ways of Losing Citizenship

Under the INA, a U.S. citizen – whether by birth or naturalization – can lose his or her citizenship by performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing citizenship:

1. voluntarily naturalizing in a foreign state after age 18;

2. taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision of a foreign state, after age 18;

3. entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state that is engaged in hostilities against the United States;

4. serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state;

5. accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision of a foreign state, after age 18, if the individual acquires the nationality of that country;

6. accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision of a foreign state, after age 18, if a declaration of allegiance to that country is required;

7. making a formal, written renunciation of U.S. citizenship while in the United States when the United States is in a state of war, if done in the manner prescribed by the Attorney General and if the Attorney General finds the renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or

8. committing any act of treason against the United states, or attempting to overthrow by force or bear arms against the United States.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
• Becoming a member of any proscribed subversive organization within 5 years of naturalization.

Is there any Americabn organization that is considered legal by law but still considered to be subversive for purpose of this kind of de-naturalization?
 
Other Ways of Losing Citizenship

Under the INA, a U.S. citizen – whether by birth or naturalization – can lose his or her citizenship by performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing citizenship:

1. voluntarily naturalizing in a foreign state after age 18;

2. taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision of a foreign state, after age 18;

5. accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision of a foreign state, after age 18, if the individual acquires the nationality of that country;

6. accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision of a foreign state, after age 18, if a declaration of allegiance to that country is required;

How are these statements can be related to thread Leaving USA after citizenship started by arsha on the same forum? (Couldn't provide the full link, because of restrictions)

Which info is correct?
 
I'm sure these are just there but they really don't enforce em.
I already suggested you to google stuff before posting misleading answers. You are wrong about this - this used to be under section 340(d) of the older INA, and it was repealed by the act of Congress in 1994. This legislation was known as Immigration and Nationality Technical Correction Act of 1994, and its section 104(b) dealt with the repealing section 340(d) of the INA:
SEC. 104. INTENT TO RESIDE PERMANENTLY IN THE UNITED STATES AFTER NATURALIZATION.
...
(b) CONFORMING REPEAL.--Section 340(d) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1451(d)) is repealed.

So, no, it does not exist at all instead of merely not being enforced.
 
Top